You don't know your own strength until strength is the only choice you have.

[Jeff Gross]

You don't know your own strength until strength is the only choice you have. - Challenged Athlete Foundation
by Jeff Gross


When a clock is hungry, it goes back four seconds.


More is sometimes better. Better always is.


The Holy Trinity of Tube Replacement

There are three commandments to mounting an inner tube: put the tube in the tire, put the tube in the rim, put the tire on the rim. Order is important and no jumping ahead.
Put the tube in the tire. Give it a mouthful of air for a shape you can work with, and then close the valve. Fit the tube inside the tire all the way around, positioning the valve next to the hole in the rim. Do not push the tube into the rim or insert the valve into the hole â€" it is forbidden until the next step!
Put the tube in the rim. Put the stem valve into the hole in the rim. Push the tube over the rim to seat it in the rim. Do not mount the tire bead into the rim â€" it is forbidden until the next step!
Put the tire on the rim. Push the bead over the rim all the way around. When you get stuck, go back to the side opposite the sticking point and push the bead into the middle of the rim. The middle of the rim is deepest, which means it makes a smaller diameter circle around the wheel. Moving the bead to this smaller circle will give more wiggle room. Work toward the sticking point around both sides of the wheel, keeping your thumb on the tire and sliding around. If you are still stuck, push the last of the bead over the rim by rolling it with the palms of your hands. It may go in a snap, or it may take several pushes to slowly stretch its way over.
One final thing â€" go all the way around the tire, pushing it away from the side to visually check that the tube is not showing. When you get to the valve, push it up into the tire and pull back down. All this so that the tube does not get pinched where it will blow out under pressure.
You are done! Now inflate.


Police were called to a day care where a three-year-old was resisting a rest.


San Diego Sheriff Takes a Narrow Approach to Bicycle Positioning

Judy Frankel, who was instrumental in getting sharrow and bike signage treatment in Encinitas, received the following email from the County Sheriff. Highlight is mine. Be aware that the law is intentionally open to personal judgement: a bicyclist must ride "as close as practicable" to the right side of the road, except in a "substandard width lane." The sheriff understands the law, he just interprets it differently than bicycle advocates would like:

Judy, Likewise I appreciate the open line of communication. So far, what you have sent me is via, Facebook, Youtube, and cyclists' blogs. Nothing statutory or case law interpreting the law the way you see it. Provide me with that and it could influence my opinion. Let me ask you a question. Per an e-mail I got from Karl Rudnick, a cyclist has a preferred operating space of 5 feet. If the number one cyclist is riding over the SHARROW so as to avoid an opening car door, wouldn't putting 1-2 other cyclist's to that person's left be unsafe based on the preferred operating space theory. To me, two cyclists = 10 feet and three cyclists = 15 feet required for safe operation and your claim is that Highway 101 is a substandard width lane. Also, I still have NOT seen a definition of a substandard width lane by any governmental entity that refers to a minimum numerical width. A Smart car could probably pass a cyclist on 101 no problem whereas a Ford F350 wouldn't which makes California's definition of a substandard width lane per the vehicle code very subjective. Karl has sent me e-mails where lane size has been implied but still no definition in regards to a measured size. Again, I recognize the cyclists right where SHARROWS are placed to control the lane when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane. Once those conditions are not present anymore, the cyclist must move back to the right. I will educate the deputies here about SHARROWS but as far as I am concerned, riding 2-3 abreast is a violation of the vehicle code. Also, if you could provide me with the written opinions based on case/statutory law of the law enforcement, Caltrans and lawyers who are familiar with bike law you claim support your opinion I would take time to read them. I agree with your last sentence in that I would like to see a 21202 CVC violation make it to the California Court of Appeals because then it would be in black and white with no room for interpretation. We have seen it recently with cell phones People v. Nelson (Nov. 14, 2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 1083 and seatbelts People v. Overland (Feb. 18, 2011) 193 Cal.App.4th Supp. 9. The person who received a cell phone ticket for talking on the cell phone while stopped at a red light took it all the way claiming they weren't driving the vehicle. Another person had the shoulder belt of their seat belt under their arm and claimed they were still wearing their seatbelt. In both these cases the tickets were upheld but it goes to show that when you believe there should be a different take on the law you can take it all the way. Now, the question is….do you have somebody who was cited for 21202 under these circumstances who wants to go all the way!

Those who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.



Death and Taxes: Standard Auto Mileage Rates for 2013

The 2013 standard mileage rates for use of an automobile are 56.5¢ per mile for business miles driven (an increase of 1¢ from 2012), and 24¢ per mile for medical or moving purposes (up 1¢ from 2012). The rate for rendering gratuitous services to a charitable organization remains unchanged at 14¢ per mile.
The standard mileage rate for business is based on an annual study of the fixed and variable costs of operating an automobile. The rate for medical and moving expenses is based on variable costs. Taxpayers always have the option of calculating the actual costs of using their vehicle rather than using the standard mileage rate.
A taxpayer may not use the business standard mileage rate for any vehicle after using any depreciation method under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) or claiming a Section 179 deduction for that vehicle, or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously.


Did you hear about the fellow whose whole left side was cut off? He's all right now.


Bike lots,
Jeff Gross
jeff@fullcommitment.com

[Frank Quan]

Also, I still have NOT seen a definition of a substandard width lane by any governmental entity that refers to a minimum numerical width

Less than 12'.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/pdf/english/chp0300.pdf

[karlos]

Frank - That is a minimum width for a lane under certain conditions, irregardles of whether a bicycle is present. The CA definition of a sub-standard lane, in the bicycle context, is somewhat subjective - "too narrow to be shared for a car and bicycle side-by-side." Many argue that it should remain subjective as, although 14 ft is widely regarded as a yardstick, there are instances where 14' is not wide enough - see http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/advocacy/widths-buffers/

The only state which has a numerical width as an objective definition for substandard width in the bicycle context is Texas: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/TN/7/C/551/B/551.103. Note that it states BOTH 14 feet (A) AND the California subjective definition (B)

TEX TN. CODE ANN. § 551.103 : Texas Statutes - Section 551.103: OPERATION ON ROADWAY
(a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless:

(1) the person is passing another vehicle moving in the same direction;

(2) the person is preparing to turn left at an intersection or onto a private road or driveway;

(3) a condition on or of the roadway, including a fixed or moving object, parked or moving vehicle, pedestrian, animal, or surface hazard prevents the person from safely riding next to the right curb or edge of the roadway; or

(4) the person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is:

(A) less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane; or

(B) too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side.

(b) A person operating a bicycle on a one-way roadway with two or more marked traffic lanes may ride as near as practicable to the left curb or edge of the roadway.

(c) Persons operating bicycles on a roadway may ride two abreast. Persons riding two abreast on a laned roadway shall ride in a single lane. Persons riding two abreast may not impede the normal and reasonable flow of traffic on the roadway. Persons may not ride more than two abreast unless they are riding on a part of a roadway set aside for the exclusive operation of bicycles.

[karlos]

I am also attaching a reponse from one of San Diego's more experienced bike advocates, Serge Issakov, to Sgt O'Boyle's statements above regarding how we should be riding in a lane with sharrows. He has not heard back from Sgt. O'Boyle. This is very well written, and is quite educational about the specifics of the California Vehicle Code as it applies to bicyclists.

enjoy -

[Serge]

The dialog continues.

O'Boyle:

On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 7:09 AM, O'Boyle, Anthony <Anthony.OBoyle@sdsheriff.org> wrote:
I got it Serge. It was well written but hasn't swayed my opinion that riding 2-3 abreast is both illegal AND unsafe.

Serge:

Thank you.  I was hoping you would explain your position with some specificity.   I would very much appreciate it if you could at least answer the following questions.

I believe you've agreed that cyclists riding single-file in a sharrow-marked lane are not in violation of 21202(a) because of the "substandard width lane" exception in 21202(a)(3), right?  That is, since traffic engineers have determined the lane is"too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane" and marked it accordingly, the 21202(a) requirement for bicyclists to "ride as close as practicable to the right..." is excepted.

And, yet, you're saying that 2-3 abreast is illegal in the same lane (presumably a violation of 21202(a)).  Why would the presence of a cyclist to the right of another cyclist affect whether or not the 21202(a)(3) substandard width lane exception released the cyclist from having to meet the "ride as close as practicable to the right..." requirement?  I mean, the presence of another cyclist does not change the width of the lane, does it?

Also, I'm 52 years old and have been riding side-by-side with other cyclists all over California since I was 12... for forty years.  I've never been ticketed or in a crash because of it (cyclists in front of me have caused me to crash, twice in those 40 years, but never cyclists beside me).   Why do you believe riding 2-3 abreast is unsafe?

O'Boyle:

Simple Serge, If cyclist #1 is proceeding straight and perceives a hazard that cyclist # 2 or 3 doesn't and cyclist # 1 jerks to the left to avoid said hazard he ends up causing a collision taking down cyclists # 2 and 3. I do watch the Tour De France and Giro Di Italia and I see what happens when cyclists ride in packs and one goes down.  If cyclist # 1 takes the lane properly in a sharrowed lane there will not be sufficient safe space for cyclists # 2 and 3 to his left. I hope that clears it up for you.

Now Serge maybe you can answer one for me. Through all of these back and forth e-mails I have exchanged with numerous members of the cycling community, I still have not seen one quoting a peace officer or case law that agrees with the cycling community's interpretation of the law. I was at the San Diego County Sheriff's Traffic Sergeant's meeting last week which had the 7 Traffic Sergeants from all the Sheriff's commands throughout the county and none agreed with your interpretation of the law. Who, from the Law Enforcement community or Judicial Community can you refer me to who agrees with your interpretation of the law?

Tony

And my latest reply:

I believe there is a strong bias against accepting bicyclists as part of normal traffic in our culture, and this bias is evident within the law enforcement and judicial communities, where it is often manifested in interpretation of the vehicle code that ignores the plain meaning of the words.     I mentioned an example of that bias within the judicial community in my letter - the Woolley case in which an officer and a judge found a cyclist to be in violation of 21202 for not riding as close as practicable to the right despite clear evidence he was traveling faster than other traffic at that time.  Sadly this was not an isolated odd case, it's fairly typical.  So I'm not surprised that it's difficult to find someone in these communities who interprets these laws without this bias.

That said, I don't think many have been asked the specific question we are dealing with here:  In a traffic lane that is of substandard width lane per 21202(a)(3), where single file cyclists are not required to ride "as close as practicable to the right", is riding side by side a violation of 21202(a)?   And, if so, how so?

Or, as I asked previously, and you did not yet address: Why would the presence of a cyclist to the right of another cyclist affect whether or not the 21202(a)(3) substandard width lane exception released the cyclist from having to meet the "ride as close as practicable to the right..." requirement?  I mean, the presence of another cyclist does not change the width of the lane, does it?

Thank you for explaining why you believe cycling side by side is unsafe.  Close/tight Tour de France pack riding is one thing (and even these risks pale in comparison to those associated with bike-car crashes, which many of seek to mitigate with conspicuous lane positioning); two cyclists riding a few feet apart is quite another, and that's what we're talking about here.  Bicyclists just riding along side-by-side are naturally both looking ahead and seeing not only obstacles in their path, but obstacles in the other's path, and adjusting accordingly well before they are reached, often with verbal communication about them.